On 01/11/15 04:40, Oleg Endo wrote:
Any particular reason why the SEQUENCE handling isn't done first, then
the REG_INC and CALL insn handling? I'd probably explicitly return
false if we had a sequence and none of its elements returned true.
There's no need to check anything on the toplevel SEQU
On Thu, 2015-01-08 at 14:18 -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 01/08/15 05:23, Oleg Endo wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Currently reg_set_p doesn't handle sequence rtx, which I've identified
> > as the root cause of PR 64479. There is another alternative fix for the
> > PR, but I'd like to get some comments rega
On 01/08/15 05:23, Oleg Endo wrote:
Hi,
Currently reg_set_p doesn't handle sequence rtx, which I've identified
as the root cause of PR 64479. There is another alternative fix for the
PR, but I'd like to get some comments regarding letting reg_set_p also
handle sequence rtx:
Index: gcc/rtlanal.
Hi,
Currently reg_set_p doesn't handle sequence rtx, which I've identified
as the root cause of PR 64479. There is another alternative fix for the
PR, but I'd like to get some comments regarding letting reg_set_p also
handle sequence rtx:
Index: gcc/rtlanal.c
